Advertising and selling
Tuesday, July 17th, 2007“Advertising can be explained as the science of fishing for human intelligence long enough for him to the money,” said Canadian humorist Stephen Leacock.
Advertising is a means to an end. We are here for the distribution of the ring is not to win gongs. The problem is to do a lot of advertising, master drawing too much attention to himself for herself, not in a position to ensure that the remaining ninety-five percent of the distance to close the store the product behind the idea.
He argues that advertising creative Customer people have too many non-trade concerns, as creator and fun state awards, the Prix sparkle. Most creators wanted reaction man wants their message is telling his colleagues: “Gee, I wished I would have thought.”
Why do we pay more to do what we do? Are we TV Sitcom writer, to make people laugh? Are we gag writers for the observation data of actors, putting our finger on the truth to say? Are we prose stylists and book beautifully written passages of literature?
What is really cleverpeople “mark” Diamond brand, brand signature, the brand architecture, brand onion, hado mark. Say the word “mark” quite often, and everything is in order.
I am not saying that the introduction of the brand is not always the answer. What I am saying this is not always the answer. Yetit’s a simple hastyway outto avoidthe malaise of thinking on the “S” word. There are big brands that are a bonus for each product with their name.
How brands received was built, that advertising sells the product in a properway. The brand is part of the building, which deserves to be highlighted. And we built a brand. Once built a brand, you can sell the brand, because it exists. But there are practical products buildsthe mark, you can not sell the brand, because it does not exist. And it is ridiculous to sell something that does not exist
All were agreed on one thing, “Mark” is completely hidden to the human spirit, and the “mark” is ordered. The problem is that if you replace faith Do you think your answer is more accurate in every situation, no matter what happens. And, of course, this is not what is the reason why we have so many expensive advertisements all the time.
A problem with this way, the blind is that lazy treaties, many brands are the same values in a given market. If all the brands sold on the market are regarded as brand values of who wins? This is obviously a no, because unless you want to change the dynamics of the market, the market leader has to win by any market growth. So, given that, in essence, there is only a leading brand in each market.
But if “brand” advertising is not infallible, what is it? I would like to propose to us as an option to think blind faith. The problem, as we have seen, with the “mark” is that we have an entire industry seeks man, what we do, as complex as possible, to ensure that for each virtuallyimpenetrable outsider.